COL008

Ethics
Utilitarianism

14
Module on
Utilitarianism

Ar
ist This module discusses the concept and importance of utilitarianism and why is it being used until the
present. It also shows the connection on morality and our moral actions based on reasoning and our mental
frames and provides insight into how we view what is right or wrong based on the consequences of our

otl
action.

e
At the end of this module, you should be able to:
1. articulate what utilitarianism is
2. critique utilitarianism
3. identify and discuss scenarios or situation relatively to utilitarianism
4. make use of utilitarianism

&
Sa Utilitarianism

int
Utilitarianism deals with a form of consequentialism. The terms consequentialism refers to the moral
rightness or wrongness that is considered as an act that depends on the possible consequence that produces.
The grounds for consequentialist estates, the inaction, and actions on which negative consequences are
considered, overshadow the positive or good side of consequences that will be deemed wrong morally.
Meanwhile, the so-called actions and inactions whose positive consequences can actually outweigh
consequences that are considered negative and can be deemed morally.

Th We discussed that the harm and benefit utilitarianism can actually characterize in any more may
considered. Classical utilitarians Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832) and John Stuart Mill (1806–1873) defined
terms such as happiness and unhappiness and also the art of pleasure and pain. In this view, the action and
inaction that can cause minimal pain or unhappiness and additional pleasure or happiness that the

o
alternative action and inaction can provide can be deemed right morally. Meanwhile, such action and

1
ma Ethics
Utilitarianism
COL008

s inaction that can cause unhappiness or pain and less happiness or so-called pleasure or happiness that the
alternative action and inaction can provide be deemed wrong morally.

Explanation of utilitarian theory

Normative categories
Tannsjo T. (2002) Understanding Ethics an Introduction to Moral Theory

To understand utilitarianism further, suitable terminologies to the task should be understood and adopted.
Among the existing utilitarians, several terms that are related to morality and a sense of technicality are
commonly used and considered. The sharp distinction is made in the middle of right and wrong. If the
action is neither right nor correct, then it will be considered as wrong. If the action is not wrong, then it
will be considered it as right. The terminology “right” when used by a utilitarian has a relatively weaker
commendatory force than when used as an ordinary language or term.

Illustration
As illustrated to the figure or picture shown above, what does it mean when we say that a particular action
is given and promulgated as obligatory or must or should to be done? Then, not to perform the given action
would be wrong. We are here speaking in behalf of the particular and given actions, such as the action a
certain agent performs at a given time (e.g., my writing this right now) and not generic actions (or types or
kinds of actions), such as theft, dishonest, and murder.

Objections to utilitarianism
There are objections to utilitarianism. Utilitarianism can be trivially true. Who can actually object to the
dictum that we must or should maximize the welfare? Who can argue that we ought to act in a particular
way occasionally that does not maximize its welfare? However, theory is far from the truth. The end also
justifies the means, and there is no trivial truth. The most relevant and significant objections that are
related to the theory should be examined, and we also indicated how a utilitarian would attempt to answer
them. Generally, the decision on whether the answers given to the objections are convincing is up to the
reader or the examiner.

The following are the objections to utilitarianism:

 At some point, utilitarianism is impossible to apply.

 Utilitarianism is considered a threat to close friendship and relationships.
 Utilitarianism is extremely demanding.
 Utilitarianism is extremely permissive.
 Utilitarianism does not take the equality questions seriously.

Consequentialism – It deals with the goodness of an action, which is determined exclusively by its
consequences.

2
 COL008
Ethics
Utilitarianism

Utilitarianism – It is a given particular type of consequentialist ethical theory.

 The classical utilitarians and creators of the traditions include John Stuart Mill and Jeremy
Bentham.
 The act of utilitarianism refers to an action that is morally required if and only if it maximizes the
utility. Generally, the term utilitarianism refers to the act or action that is relative to utilitarianism.
 The term optimific is used to describe and illustrate actions that maximizes utility.
 Utility, which is also known for “greatest goof for the greatest number,” deals precisely with the
highest balance net of happiness over unhappiness and does not signify happiness without
considering the suffering involved.

Utility calculus – In utility calculus, we can add up the units of positive and good utility, subtract all the
units of negative utility, and obtain an exact number of and numerous units of utility that are produced by
the given action.

How to apply reasoning related to consequentialist:

1. identify what is good intrinsically
2. identify what is bad intrinsically
3. identify all the available options
4. in every available option and identify the value of its possible results
5. execute an action that yields the highest ratio of good results to bad ones.

Attractions of utilitarianism

Impartiality – The interests of everyone are equally considered.

Justifies conventional moral wisdom – Murder, rape, and slavery are considered wrong as it results to
extremely unhappy people.
Conflict resolution – Utilitarianism provides a procedure for creating hard and difficult moral decisions.
Moral flexibility – It explains why moral prohibitions against lying, stealing, etc. may be occasionally
broken.
The general form or the whole concept of utilitarianism explains many of our most basic intuitions
regarding what actions are right and wrong.

Moral community
 Moral community consists of those whose interests are morally obligated to consider for their own
sake.
 Utilitarian moral community consists of all beings that are capable of suffering.
 As stated by Bentham, “the question is not, can they reason? Nor can they talk? But, can they
suffer?”
 Utilitarians were way ahead of their times on women and animal rights.

Agent neutrality
The concept of consequentialism is agent neutrality, that is, it does not give any preference to the desires of
the agents, their happiness, preferences, or even life. The agent may be obliged to consider sacrifice any or
all items mentioned above.

Assessing actions and intentions with utilitarian framework

 Actions are evaluated on the actual basis of consequences.
 The right action is the action that maximizes the utility in an actual basis.
 The right intention is the intention that maximizes the utility in an expected basis.
 The intentions are evaluated on the expected consequences and not on the actual consequences.
 You can execute an action that can be wrong but still is praiseworthy morally.

Illustration

3
 COL008
Ethics
Utilitarianism
Example: You see a drowning old lady and decide to save her life. This is considered as a morally
praiseworthy action that can turn out to be a wrong action because the drowning old lady is actually Hitler.

Example: You decide to steal someone’s SUV car. This is a morally blameworthy action that actually turns
out to be the action right as that person is going to kill and hit someone while drunk driving.

How do we measure and compare preferences or happiness?

Epistemic problem:
There is a specific epistemological problem or issues relative to the fact that utilitarianism tell us we can
never know what are the possible action is, but this is not a huge problem because we can evaluate the
intentions of the person in accordance to the expected consequences.

In-depth problem:

How can we define or compare preferences? We can do this when we accept the nonhedonistic views that
it will become increasingly difficult to make a comparison and the utilitarianism can lose so much of its
attractiveness because of its simplicity.

Utilitarianism is extremely demanding

In this module, we will tackle and discuss the three areas that are relatively connected to the subtopic that
utilitarianism is extremely demanding.

The tree areas are as follows:

 deliberation
 motivation
 action

Deliberation
Utilitarianism requires an excessive amount of deliberation in all aspects to determine the right action
because the right action is the one with best accumulated consequences overall. Until the end, it will
consider how it affects every sentiment of organism on the entire planet.

Motivation
1. In the utilitarian perspective, the amount of the right motivations is the one that produces the most
happiness.
2. Utilitarianism suggests and recommends that one need to have the motivations of a saint to be
always motivated to utilize at the maximum.

Action
1. Utilitarianism violates principles that are generally accepted in reasoning moral that must be
implied.
2. Utilitarianism indicates that the right life is a life of full constant and extreme sacrifice.
3. The ordinary way of thinking about the actions that we used to think are considered superogatory,
praiseworthy, and admirable but not required. However, in accordance to utilitarianism, all right
actions are considered required and a must.
4. Utilitarianism indicates we are always doing and executing the wrong thing because the given
standard of the right action is extremely high.

Impartiality objection
1. This objection indicates that focusing on caring for one’s family is generally optimific if we
consider all consequences. Therefore, according to utilitarianism, caring for one’s family is
generally the right and correct thing to do.

4
 COL008
Ethics
Utilitarianism
2. Utilitarianism requires one to be completely impartial. However, many people feel they have
special duties to a certain person or individual, such as:
 spouses
 countrymen
 humans
 children
 parents

No intrinsic wrongness
1. In this view, nothing is absolutely and considered consistently wrong, including the following:
 murder
 genocide
 slavery
 torture
 rape

Integrity objection
The following are the examples of simple argument that might or can capture one’s intuitions about the
role of integrity in ethics.

1. Utilitarianism is correct that acting with integrity is not considered morally relevant to the morality
of an action.
2. Acting with integrity is morally relevant to the morality of an action.
3. Thus, utilitarianism is not considered correct.

Bernard Williams several relevant examples on utilitarianism critique

1. A man is told by the dictator who is extremely evil that if he considers to execute one innocent
individual or people, then the lives of nine other people will be spared; if he refuses, all ten will be
executed.

2. A poor and awful scientist who is having trouble supporting himself and his family is offered a
lucrative job to make weapons made from different kinds of deadly chemicals, and the weapons
will be crafted with or without his participation.

Conclusion:
In both side cases of utilitarianism, it is generally wrong to act with integrity and refuse to kill an innocent
person to create or make weapons from deadly chemical components.

Injustice objection

The following examples are relatively connected to injustice objection:

1. Lonesome stranger: framing a lonesome stranger for a specific crime to prevent harm.

2. Organ-harvesting doctor: a doctor that goes around harvesting numerous organs of homeless
people or individuals to save the lives of well-loved and important people in the community.

Conclusion:
This objection is mainly due to rights. Utilitarianism cannot account for rights. This objection was largely
designed by Bentham, as he stated that rights were nonsense on stilts.

Shaffer Landau’s injustice argument against utilitarianism:

 Utilitarianism occasionally requires everybody to commit serious injustices.
 The correct and exact moral theory will never push us to commit serious injustices.

5
 COL008
Ethics
Utilitarianism
 Therefore, in general, utilitarianism is not a correct moral theory.

How can a utilitarian respond on this argument?

Given that the argument is valid, a utilitarian can either deny that the first premise is true or deny that the
second part premise is actually true.

A note about utilitarianism and political philosophy

1. Individual rights are considered as the most basic foundation of the society until you receive rights
that do not actually have in a society or community.

2. Given that utilitarianism does not counter human or individual rights, forming a stable community
or society in accordance to utilitarian principles is impossible.

3. Political philosophy is related to utilitarianism. All political philosophers accepted the theory of
utilitarianism; these political philosophers include:
 Robert Nozick
 John Rawls

They are two political philosophers of the 20th century or the present era, notwithstanding their widely
diverging approaches to political philosophy. Nozick and Rawls also drew an inspiration from Kant and
the social tradition contract.